On Sep 24, 2012, at 6:58 PM, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote:
> You, the iframe champion,
Champion is a strong title. I would say I created a proof-of-concept.
> ought to have known that (when implemented,)
> iframe's seamless attribute could be used: [1]
>
> ]] this will cause links to open in the parent browsing context
> unless an explicit self-navigation override is used (target="_self")[[
>
> With @seamless, then AT probably ought to not announce that it is a
> iframe, which sounds like an advantage to me. (But I might be taking my
> mouth to full, there, about how AT will react to it.)
One of the goals of that proof-of-concept is to make it so that you don't have to access the "long description" unless you explicit drill into it, like @longdesc. Using @seamless would prevent that benefit to using an iframe.
>> It may
>> also be appropriate for this page to open links in the same target.
>> In any case, it's something to consider, but I don't think it'd be a
>> concern, so to speak.
>
> I suspect that your lack of concern is not simply because you "believe"
> in iframe but also because you view the case for long descriptions, as
> such, as less important. This is follows implicitly from your focus on
> new and improved techniques - accessible SVG and all that. Thus, it is
> a priority assessment. In combination with a "but it will not be a
> problem in practice" standpoint. Thus, you see 'iframe' and 'longdesc'
> as more ore less 'equally bad', except that iframe has wider support.
> You probably do not expect iframe to be much used either, I suspect-
That's a fair assessment.
> David took a another attitude, I feel: [3]
>
> ]] It even strikes me that Someone With Skills could even make an
> iframe that looks like it lives on the back of the image, with
> the description contents, using JS, CSS, HTML, etc. :-), as an
> experiment. [[
>
> So I would recommend giving the issue a little higher focus. E.g. you
> yourself have said that the iframe technique was described in A11Y
> authoring guides. And I personally would find it interesting if the
> HTMLwg produced as text about how to provide long descriptions - in the
> most optimal way - with other techniques than longdesc. For example,
> how to best use <iframe> for that purpose. Because, as I see it, to use
> iframe, requires both attention to the very iframe attribute as well as
> to the content one places there. And from one angle, I think that this
> need for more attention, could be an advantage - to the endusers.
> Because it can be all to simple to just provide a (longdesc) link, and
> hope that the user will be able to open it and navigate to the relevant
> part of that page. What I mean is: Even the resources that longdesc
> points to should be authored to function well.
All wise recommendations. I don't want to commit myself to creating a WCAG technique for iframe-linked long descriptions, because as you noted, I think this isn't a much better approach than @longdesc, but I would commit myself to review your forays into this technique if you felt inclined to create some.
Cheers,
James